United States v. Principe-Espinoza, et al

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
June 24, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-51010
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FRANK PRINCIPE-ESPINOZA, also known
as Roberto Carlos Sanchez-Gutierez,
also known as Frank Principe,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-01-CR-823-DB
--------------------
Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Frank Principe-Espinoza, federal prisoner # 14170-051,
appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)
motion wherein he argued that the 2001 Sentencing Guidelines
version of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b) should be applied retroactively to
his sentence under Amendment 632.
Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines may not be applied
retroactively upon a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) unless

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-51010
-2-
they are specifically set forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c).
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a), p.s. (Nov. 2001). Amendment 632 is not
listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c) and therefore may not be applied
retroactively under Principe-Espinoza's motion. See United
States v. Drath, 89 F.3d 216, 218 (5th Cir. 1996) (amendment not
listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c) “cannot be given retroactive
effect in the context of a § 3582(c)(2) motion”). Accordingly,
the district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied
Principe-Espinoza’s 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --